The Korean Peninsula remains divided but in recent times it looked like a fresh start was on the horizon because of the "sunshine policy" adopted by more pragmatic leaders within the last government.  North Korea, in return, responded favourably and you could see that a genuine thaw was happening.  However, the new leader of South Korea, Lee Myung Bak, is turning the clock back and quickly.  Now we are seeing the demise of the "sunshine policy" and the real threat of a maveric causing mayhem.  Therefore, will Lee Myung Bak wise up or will he upset the balance too much?

Before returning to the current leader of South Korea it is worth mentioning a little bit about the past.  After all, most people and societies have been manipulated to solely focus on the negatives of North Korea, however, what about the negatives of South Korea?

Therefore, which nation is more independent than the other?  The answer is obviously North Korea because it is South Korea which allows foreign armies to protect her.  Also, until the 1990s nearly every leader of South Korea could trace their family links to Japan and the imperial system.  So unlike the leaders of North Korea, who fought against Japanese imperialism, it is clear that South Korean leaders had supported Japanese imperialism against their own people.

Given this, the North Korean leaders do have a point about being "the heirs" of an independent nation.  However, if we focus on economics, then it is clear that since the 1980s the government of North Korea have been found wanting.  Because while South Korea began to develop rapidly the opposite happened in North Korea, and in this field much work needs to be done to kick start the North Korean economy.  So you clearly have positives and negatives within both nations.  However, from a North Korean point of view, they could have focused on their economy much more if  South Korea had not been so hostile.

For much of the past decade relations have begun to develop between South Korea andNorth Korea, and the "sunshine policy" did help to pave the way for better ties.  Some South Koreans complained that they "bent over backwards" in order to get only basic results, however, in truth the results were not so basic.  After all, you had a new regional economic zone, a new train service begun, South Korean tourists were welcomed in special areas, and trade began to increase. 

More important, the nuclear issue began to unravel in a positive nature and this was mainly due to both nations working together in order to foster mutual respect.  Yet this thaw and hope appears to be under threat because of the new leader.  Therefore, the new leader, Lee Myung Bak, went for the jugular from day one and he came out with anti-North Korean comments.  Even more alarming were comments made by a senior general who warned about a possible attack against North Korea.

Therefore, the changed government in South Korea is clearly anti-North Korea and pro-America and pro-Japan.  So Kim Jong-il responded in kind and he also began to become more assertative.  Given this, tensions are once more causing concern and the "old ways" are returning.  This recent situation is clearly not in the interest of any nation in the region because Northeast Asia needs stability, and not mayhem or racked up tensions.

Overall, the future of the Korean Peninsula now looks bleak again and you clearly have one person to blame for this, and this applies to the South Korean leader, Lee Myung Bak.  So can more moderate voices in South Korea rise up and prevent further tensions?  Or will he keep on blundering on?  For now, we still don`t really know because it is still early days for the new leader of South Korea, however, the omens do not look good, do they?

Lee Jay Walker Dip BA MA

The Coptic Christians of Egypt resided in this land a long time before the Arabs sacked this nation and colonized their land.  Despite massive persecution, colonialization, jizya tax, massive inequality, pogroms, massacres, and dhimmitude; many still remained loyal because of the strength of the Coptic Christian church which was extremely tenacious.   Of course some Muslim leaders were very moderate, however, it only took one major spark or crisis of confidence within the Muslim community to cause havoc.  Therefore, Coptics understood that being passive was their only option and the same applied to dhimmitude for many centuries.

In more recent times many parts of Africa are in transition because in the early 19th century Islam dominated over Christianity in Eastern Africa apart from Ethiopia and Eritrea where the Christian population is approximately 50%.  However, by the middle of the twentieth century times had changed because Christianity grew rapidly in Chad, Kenya, and Uganda; therefore, the religious map of Eastern Africa often resembled a religious timebomb and added to this was inter-ethnic and inter-religious disputes which made the matter even more confusing.  Also, by the end of the twentieth century Christianity was around 17% or more in Sudan and the mainly Christian elite of the south fought back against radical Islam.

Therefore, the embattled Coptic Christians of Egypt were no longer isolated within the dynamics of the surrounding geography and churches are now being planted in parts of northern Sudan.  Given this, it is hoped that greater Christian unity will lead to more pressure on Islamic states which discriminate against Christians in this part of Africa.  So now it may be time for the Coptics to reach out and strengthen their cause?

Turning back to Egypt, then it is clear that organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood desire to create an Islamic state and the central government often panders to Muslim radicals.  Therefore, Coptic Christians suffer dhimmitude via radical Islam and major persecution at the hands of the Egyptian government.  They are in a no-win situation and while many want "true democracy" others do not because they fear that radical Islam may come to power in the long run.  Given this, the Christians of Egypt are in a major dilemma.  Do they fight back against the central government which persecutes them or do they remain quiet because of the fear of radical Islam?  In truth, whatever they do could backfire and this is the problem!

Therefore, recent flashpoints will continue and Coptics will suffer more religious persecution, educational inequality, inequality in law, discrimination in the workplace, discrimination in national government, and they will be limited by land laws which will hinder them from building new churches or monasteries.   So, overall, their situation looks bleak but the changing religious map could be a future lifeline?   For now, however, they must remain to be firm and strong and to unite against their many enemies within Egyptian society.  Yet if any community can survive against all the odds, then this certainly applies to the Coptic Christians of Egypt who have remained strong in faith despite all the odds being stacked against them.

Lee Jay Walker Dip BA MA

http://journals.aol.com/leejaywalker/uk/

 

The invasion of Iraq at first appeared to be a great success because the Iraqi armed forces were defeated relatively easily and Saddam Hussein was overthrown.  However, since the initial period which promised much the opposite happened.  Therefore, various different Iraqi insurgents have helped to keep America and her allies at bay.  The consequences of this failed policy is clear for all to see because religious minorities, females, and other minorities reside in fear.  Also, terrorism is a terrible consequence of the invasion of Iraq and now this nation does not exist with regards to centralization.  So why and how did America get it so badly wrong?

The first main factor is the lies behind the reasons for war because no weapons of mass destruction have ever been found and of course you had no links with Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden.  On the contrary, Saddam Hussein was anti radical Islam because he feared this movement would overthrow his secular regime.  Therefore, when you start a war from "a lie" it is clear that you will have long term problems.

More important, the same United States of America (USA) supported Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war and during this war the USA stated that Iraq was fighting to stem the tide of radical Islam.  However, this factor was ignored by President Bush and so was how Saddam Hussein managed to maintain power.  After all, if you do not judge the power plays of a nation then how can you take over the mechanism of government?

In all truth Saddam Hussein was a despot and this can not be doubted, however, given the reality of Iraq, then maybe this was the only way to modernize this nation?  Because prior to the First Gulf War the government of Iraq under Saddam Hussein supported religious freedom, the rights of women, and implemented secular law.   For Christians, it was a time of relative peace when compared with other nations in the Middle East.  Also, a clear infrastructure had been built and Baghdad was a thriving capital where commerce ruled the day.

Yet all this seems like a long time ago because the current Baghdad is a killing zone and a place where time is going backward.  Therefore, whole areas are being divided between Sunni and Shia zones and the sizeable Christian population in the capital is either on the retreat or on the margins of society.  Another negative is the rise of honour killings in Iraq and the numbers of new born babies dying because of lack of medication.

Another area of disaster is the rise of radical Islam and terrorism because prior to the war terrorism was alien to Iraq and radical Islam had been crushed.  But in the new Iraq you have people being blown to bits at weddings, funerals, going shopping, visiting the hospital, and so forth.  Therefore, most ordinary Iraqi nationals are bewildered by the complete destruction of society under the rule of America and her allies.  Given this, modern day Iraq is a major centre of radical Islam and terrorism, and the USA even sanctioned the implementation of Islamic Law to replace secular law to the disgust of Christians and secularists.

Overall, it is clear that America lied from start to finish, because even today they are claiming that it was a great success. However, only America believes this, and this applies to diehards and not rank and file Americans who clearly know the truth.  So many years after the invasion you have chaos, hatred, terrorism, the destruction of the Christian community and other minorities, honour killings, instability, radical Islam, and the complete collapse of the centralized state.  Why, put simply, America never had a plan to implement after the war and they never studied the rule of Saddam Hussein and how he maintained order via despotism.

Therefore, not only is the war in Iraq a complete failure, it would also appear that Iran gained by this naive and destructive policy because the Shia are now the new power brokers.  Given this, why no war crime tribunals for the leaders of America and the United Kingdom.  After all they have destroyed modern day Iraq and turned it into a killing field and a failed state.  Even if Iraq changes in the long term, it can never brink back the hundreds of thousands of innocents who have been killed.  So America failed from start to finish and they destroyed a nation state on grounds of misinformation.

Lee Jay Walker Dip BA MA

http://journals.aol.com/leejaywalker/uk/

http://groups.msn.com/Alternativethinkingaboutglobalissues

Egypt is the most populous Arab nation in the world, however, not all the people of Egypt are Arab?  Because the indigenous people, the Coptics, are an entirely different ethnic group and how many Arabs will have Coptic blood in them given forced conversions to Islam, gradual conversion because of dhimmitude, and of course enormous social pressures?  So why are the Coptic Christians ignored and marginalized?

Sadly, it would appear that the entire Christian community in the Middle East is marginalized and even worse, major democratic nations do not seem to care or they are half-hearted when rebuking anti-Christian attacks.  However, the Coptic Christians are special for several reasons.  Firstly, Coptic Christians spread the Christian faith via great monastic preachers and they have a direct link with early Christianity.  Secondly, their numbers make them special because you have at least 8 million Coptic Christians in Egypt and this figure may be even highter?

Given this, if they can not survive or if they are treated unequal, then what hope for the other Christian communities in the Middle East?    So because of this fact alone the Coptic Christian community is essential for Middle Eastern Christianity.  But will Christians and other nations champion their cause and work collectively with this community or will it be more marginalization?

Again if we look at past history it doesn`t look good.  After all, when Camp David was signed America, Israel, and Egypt, were happy, however, the same Anwar Sadat persecuted the Christian community via anti-Christian laws.  So just like the Christian community in Iraq which doesn`t count and which isn`t protected, it is clear that Western nations have different interests.  This fact alone should worry the Coptic Christian community because America supported the introduction of Sharia Islamic Law in Sudan in 1983, and they of course did the same in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The other stronghold in the Middle East were the Maronite Christians of Lebanon and the other Christian communities of this nation.  However, during the First Gulf War the USA once more gave the green light for Syria to crush Christian forces under General Michel Aoun.  So the same case always appears to be happening and this applies to the Christians being expendable. 

Therefore, the situation now looks bleak for the Christians of the Middle East because they face dhimmitude, terrorism, persecution, inequality via the legal system, demographic timebomb, marginalization, and so much more.  Also, history tells us that they do not count and of course most Western governments are pro-Saudi Arabia despite this nation not allowing one single Christian church.  Given this, the Christians of the Middle East must unite and they must gain strength from somewhere in order to stop this onslaught. 

Lee Jay Walker Dip BA MA

The ending of World War Two was a very long time ago, however, in Japan it appears that time is standing still because this nation is over compliant towards the USA.  Surely this nation must stand on her own two feet?  So can Japan revolutionize her thinking and establish an independent foreign policy?

Firstly, this article is not aimed at anti-American thinking, it merely applies to the need for Japan to develop an independent foreign and monetary policy.  Of course relations should remain strong with the USA and shared interests will be natural, however, at the moment it appears that Japan is a mere "lacky" of America and this simply isn`t good enough.  So of course both nations must continue to foster close relations but not at the expense of Japan`s independence.

Ex-PM Abe hinted at a shared alliance based on "democratic principles" and this applies to America, Australia, India, and New Zealand, respectively.  Also, ex-PM Abe focused on NATO and how Japan can play her role within this institution.  Much of his domestic thinking was a little strange and out of step with public opinion, however, his foreign policy objectives did make sense.  Yet the one weakness was that Japan would still remain to be "toothless" when it came to America.

So can a future political leader stand up and be counted?  I certainly hope so because how can Japan be trusted within the international community if nations don`t take her independence seriously?  This is a serious issue because Japan desires to become a permanent member of the United Nations but under the current circumstances, then many nations have reservations about this.   Given this reality, it is vital for Japan to change direction and embrace not only Asia but the international community.

If Japan does not change her thinking then her reputation within the international community will be further weakened and regional nations, for example China and the Russian Federation, will merely ignore Japan`s thinking and they will not trust her motives.  Therefore, the time is right  to transform her military doctrine and  her foreign policy because the current "lackey" status is hindering Japan.  Surely Japan wants to be known for being independent and playing a leading role within the United Nations and other major institutions.

This also applies to her monetary policies because even in this field it is clear that Japan is not doing what she really desires.  For example around 90% of all her reserves are held in either American bonds or in the dollar.  Yet with the current demise of the dollar, then is this policy justified?  Also, what about supporting the Japanese yen?  To me this policy is either naive at best or at worse it is further evidence about her limited independence.  Once more, Japan must diversify her monetary policies and look to the Euro, gold, and other currencies or international bonds, while of course still holding dollars and American bonds, but not at the current level.

So can Japan develop a new way?  Sadly, under the current leaders of Japan then this answer may still be no.  The growing power of the opposition, however, may lead to change because they claim to be more independent minded.  Yet the "cracks within her compliant policies" still appear to be thin on the ground.  Therefore, for the time being it will be the same over compliant Japan but maybe on the horizon is a new way via the rise of China and via the rise of the political opposition?

Lee Jay Walker Dip BA MA

http://journals.aol.com/leejaywalker/uk/

http://groups.msn.com/Alternativethinkingaboutglobalissues

The Korean Peninsula remains divided but in recent times it looked like a fresh start was on the horizon because of the "sunshine policy" adopted by more pragmatic leaders within the last government.  North Korea, in return, responded favourably and you could see that a genuine thaw was happening.  However, the new leader of South Korea, Lee Myung Bak, is turning the clock back and quickly.  Now we are seeing the demise of the "sunshine policy" and the real threat of a maveric causing mayhem.  Therefore, will Lee Myung Bak wise up or will he upset the balance too much?

Before returning to the current leader of South Korea it is worth mentioning a little bit about the past.  After all, most people and societies have been manipulated to solely focus on the negatives of North Korea, however, what about the negatives of South Korea?

Therefore, which nation is more independent than the other?  The answer is obviously North Korea because it is South Korea which allows foreign armies to protect her.  Also, until the 1990s nearly every leader of South Korea could trace their family links to Japan and the imperial system.  So unlike the leaders of North Korea, who fought against Japanese imperialism, it is clear that South Korean leaders had supported Japanese imperialsim against their own people.

Given this, the North Korean leaders do have a point about being "the heirs" of an independent nation.  However, if we focus on economics, then it is clear that since the 1980s the government of North Korea have been found wanting.  Because while South Korea began to develop rapidly the opposite happened in North Korea, and in this field much work needs to be done to kick start the North Korean economy.  So you clearly have positives and negatives within both nations.  However, from a North Korean point of view, they could have focused on their economy much more if  South Korea had not been so hostile.

For much of the past decade relations have begun to develop between South Korea and North Korea, and the "sunshine policy" did help to pave the way for better ties.  Some South Koreans complained that they "bent over backwards" in order to get only basic results, however, in truth the results were not so basic.  After all, you had a new regional economic zone, a new train service begun, South Korean tourists were welcomed in special areas, and trade began to increase. 

More important, the nuclear issue began to unravel in a positive nature and this was mainly due to both nations working together in order to foster mutual respect.  Yet this thaw and hope appears to be under threat because of the new leader.  Therefore, the new leader, Lee Myung Bak, went for the jugular from day one and he came out with anti-North Korean comments.  Even more alarming were comments made by a senior general who warned about a possible attack against North Korea.

Therefore, the changed government in South Korea is clearly anti-North Korea and pro-America and pro-Japan.  So Kimg Jong-il responded in kind and he also began to become more assertative.  Given this, tensions are once more causing concern and the "old ways" are returning.  This recent situation is clearly not in the interest of any nation in the region because Northeast Asia needs stability, and not mayhem or racked up tensions.

Overall, the future of the Korean Peninsula now looks bleak again and you clearly have one person to blame for this, and this applies to the South Korean leader, Lee Myung Bak.  So can more moderate voices in South Korea rise up and prevent further tensions?  Or will he keep on blundering on?  For now, we still don`t really know because it is still early days for the new leader of South Korea, however, the omens do not look good, do they?

Lee Jay Walker Dip BA MA

http://journals.aol.com/leejaywalker/uk/

Ethiopia remains to be a nation which is both mysterious and extremely rich in history and culture.  Coptic Orthodox Christianity remains to be of great importance despite the Islamic faith being represented by around 40% of the population.  Ethiopia is also a standard bearer for African freedom because this nation forced back the tide of Arabization and Islamization and this nation also fought tenaciously against Western imperialism.  Therefore, can this nation rise up once more and play a major role within Africa and further afield?

If we take a step back in history then we witness a vibrant culture based around the Coptic Orthodox Christian faith.  You can visit old treasures like Axum, where you see a mysterious form of Christianity which is fused via the rich culture of this mighty nation.  Also, if you dig deeply into the past you see a modern state forming around 2,000 years ago and an Empire which influenced other parts of East Africa and the Middle East, via Arabia Felix which once was ruled by Ethiopia.

Islam was also heavily influenced by Ethiopia and this applies to prayer, thinking, being conservative, and in many other areas.  Also, it is worth remembering that many of the founding fathers of Islam fled persecution from the outset and stayed in Ethiopia.  Indeed the Prophet Mohammed spoke favourably about this faith, however, Muslim fanatics in the future would ignore their own prophet and instead they would try to subdue Ethiopia. 

If we move closer to the 18th, 19th, and early 20th century, then we also see an independent Ethiopia which had held out against the onslaught of Arab slavery and Western slavery or control.  Therefore, Ethiopia for centuries held back the tide of both Arab colonialism and Western colonialism and it is clear that this nation does have a special place within the "soul" of Africa and further afield.  Therefore, despite Islamization taking place in parts of Ethiopia and Italians using chemical weapons against this brave nation in the 1930s, they still managed to maintain their dignity and pride by being extremely tenacious.

In modern times this nation is still trying to break free from its communist past and loss of Eritrea, which was not justified to many people because this meant that Ethiopia became landlocked.  Also, in recent times radical Somali Islamists and Arab Islamists are trying to destabilize Ethiopia in the mainly Muslim eastern parts of this nation.  Therefore, Ethiopia continues to face many major obstacles. 

However, it is hoped that Ethiopia can control all these negative forces and then unleash a new period based on economic progress and dynamism.  If any nation in Africa can break free then surely this nation is Ethiopia.  After all, this nation, unlike Christian Nubia which was crushed by Arab Islamic onslaughts and slavery, managed  to survive both the negatives of Arab colonialism and Western colonialism.  Therefore, the future may once more belong to Ethiopia providing her major faith can continue to guide this nation against all dangers.

Lee Jay Walker Dip BA MA

http://journals.aol.com/leejaywalker/uk/

BANGLADESH and PAKISTAN - the destruction of Buddhism and Hinduism

 The partition of India led to chaos and hundreds of thousands of people were murdered. After this chaos divisions would emerge between East Pakistan and West Pakistan and further bloodshed would occur, with the outcome being the sovereign nations of Bangladesh and Pakistan. However, while India remained to be multi-religious, the opposite happened in Bangladesh and Pakistan and religious minorities faced enormous problems and persecution.

To make matters worse both Bangladesh and Pakistan would witness the gradual Islamization of their societies, notably Pakistan, and massive corruption and persecution of women would continue. The Islamization of both nations was especially traumatic for Hindus in Pakistan and Buddhists in Bangladesh; and not surprisingly Islamic persecution of minorities in both nations re-awakened anti-Islamic feelings in India. For unlike the destruction of Buddhism in Afghanistan, which happened centuries earlier because of Islamic conquests, persecution and controlling all leverages of power; the Islamization of Bangladesh and Pakistan took place in the twentieth century and continues today.

Yet why were Buddhism and Hinduism being allowed to be destroyed in both nations? After all, Buddhists in Bangladesh were a small minority and they could never threaten Islam; the same applies to Hindus in Pakistan. Therefore, why did other nations remain quiet when massive religious persecution was taking place? For nations like France, the United Kingdom and United States were espousing 'democracy' and liberals were glorifying multi-faith societies and stating that Islam was a religion of peace. At the same time major institutions like the Commonwealth, which espoused global human rights, remained quiet when religious genocide was taking place in Bangladesh and Pakistan.

In Pakistan the destruction of Hinduism and persecution of Hindus took many forms. The first path was the massacre of Hindus during partition and forcing Hindus to leave via coercion. However, over the last 50 years the destruction of Hinduism in modern day Pakistan was based on past Islamic global conquests and the teachings of the Prophet Mohammed who sanctioned the persecution of non-Muslims.For the Prophet Mohammed had told his followers to 'Fight those who believe not in God nor the last day . . . Nor acknowledge the religion of truth (Islam) . . .’

Therefore, the followers of Hinduism were to be subdued in accordance with the teachings of Islamic Sharia Law, the Koran and Hadiths. Given this, Hindus were now a subdued minority, like Christians in Pakistan, and they were unequal in law and status in accordance with the teachings of Islam. At the same time Hindu temples were often converted into Muslim mosques or destroyed, and ancient Hindu architectures were destroyed.

The choice for many Hindus was either to convert to Islam in order to escape persecution, flee to India or to accept that they were second-class citizens in Pakistan and resign themselves to being persecuted. Not surprisingly Hinduism in Pakistan continued to decline and this civilization was being eradicated by Islam. The situation for Buddhists in Bangladesh was different, for Buddhism had survived countless Islamic conquests in one region because of terrain and other factors; therefore, Buddhists and other faiths had survived in the Chittagong Hill Tracts.

However, the increasing population of Bangladesh led to problems and the government of Bangladesh hoped 'to kill two birds with one stone.' This applies to moving millions of people to remote parts of Bangladesh, notably the Chittagong Hill Tracts, while at the same time this new Islamic migration would crush the mainly Buddhist tribal opposition in this region. Therefore, millions of Muslim migrants were moved into the Chittagong Hill Tracts and the mainly tribal Buddhists (some tribals are Christian, Hindu or follow traditional beliefs) became embroiled in a civil war. Islamic radicals also moved into this region and many Buddhist priests were killed, including some being beheaded.

At the same time hundreds of Buddhist temples were destroyed and the Bangladesh army took part in many massacres, and some Buddhist women were gang-raped by both Islamic zealots and the Bangladesh army. In time the mainly Buddhist tribals were overwhelmed by the armed forces of Bangladesh and Muslim migration. Their situation, however, went unnoticed in the West and Islamic nations obviously remained silent. To make matters worse, the mainly Buddhist tribes had no nation supporting them and no major world leader to draw attention to their plight.

Given this, the government of Bangladesh continued with their policy of persecuting Buddhists while Muslim migration Islamized the Chittagong Hill Tracts. Therefore, the destruction of thousands of years of Hindu/Buddhist civilization in these nations destroyed. It is clear that mainly Buddhist nations like Japan (and Shinto), Cambodia, Thailand, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, and others, should form an organization to help their co-religionists; with Japan being the main financial power to raise awareness of Buddhist persecution. If global silence continues then Buddhism will one day be eradicated in Bangladesh.

However, the global community did condemn the Taliban in Afghanistan for destroying Buddhist statues and art, yet the same global community remains quiet when Buddhist tribes are being systematically persecuted. Does this mean that Buddhist art in Afghanistan is more important than the persecution of Buddhist communities and the gang rape of Buddhist women in Bangladesh?

Surely the Hindus of Pakistan and Buddhists in the Chittagong Hill Tracts deserve better? If the international community remains silent about this crime, then soon these lands will be Islamized and ethnically 'cleansed.' This is a shame for regional nations and the global community, for they are leaving the most vulnerable and 'voiceless' without any hope. Are you alarmed, if not, why?

Lee Jay Walker Dip BA MA